Overall suggestions :
- The TC on a monthly basis through an open platform should give educative insights to the coaches & judges worldwide. We have witnessed even this year that different TC members are giving out completely different information at World Cups and the judges/coaches are left out totally confused. TC should set up an account in youtube, where they would be obliged to post at least 50 video examples with different apparatus outlining some tricky executions of some elements. So that everybody had one vision. Currently FIG TC is using «newsletters», but the wording there is often creating different interpretations.
We feel that outlining such videos and clearly stating if the throw in first rotation is valid or not — would be very useful for the judges and will create a single vision throughout everybody
- FIG should implement a system at least at Continental and World Championships to have a “live judging” in Difficulty and in Execution.
Meaning that a judge in E, when seeing a mistake of 0,30, pushes 0,3 or just 3 (to speed up) and that penalty is already inscribed in the system.
What happens currently : a judge is making notes on errors and when a huge one happens, starts thinking : “Ogh, that would have a harsh penalty in total, I should erase the previous ones”. Through “live judging” system it would not be possible to happen.
Overall suggestions :
- In case we open the score, we must set a quantity limit for the components. In this case the gymnasts would go ONLY for the most difficult and obvious components. Currently the amount of AD is unlimited in the exercise which gives an opportunity for the coaches to insert as many Masteries as possible, even though most of them are not real Masteries.
- So the proposal is either to limit the amount of AD or open the possibilities for all our components (no limit for BD or R). That would create more balance of the exercise.
- In our opinion the amount of AD must be limited as if we open the amount of R and BD the exercise will completely lose the Artistic part
- The limit in AD would also help to balance the exercises so that ribbon exercise was not constanly receiving such low points in comparison to other routines.
- To allow to perform the leaps under the throw of apparatus and to be counted as a BD. It gives amplitude and height to the exercise.
- All rotations should have an added value in comparison to a balance (not just attitude/arabesque positions) as it’s much more difficult to perform a rotation in the form in comparison to the balance in this form.
- A clear definition and difference between the penche rotation on flat foot and horizontal pivot. Currently in creates major confusions
It’s obvious that the first video is performed much clearer than the second one. The judges are much puzzled of what they should do in this case — count the second one as a penche rotation or count just one rotation as a horizontal pivot?
Our proposal to have a clear difference in the shapes of both pivots :
- Penche rotation. Trunk below horizontal, close to the leg (in the 45 degrees closer to the leg). Maximum trunk elevation as per the photo :
- Horizontal pivot. Trunk at the horizontal level + possible small devitations.
Such example would not be valid : (for penche rotation the trunk has to be lower, for horizontal pivot the gymnast must be on «releve»
Dance step combinations
- 10 seconds and a value of 0,40 does not correspond to the needs of the gymnast. Moreover, the penalty for not having at least one Dance step combination is just 0,30 so people could easily sacrifice not having a dance step combination.
For example here a top gymnast is clearly missing a dance step combination, but it does not really matter as during those 8 seconds she can perform 3 AD and earn much more.
So our proposal :
- Keep the dance step combination at 8 seconds and increase the value to a minimum of 0,50. That could potentially increase the amount of Dance step combinations in a routine when the coaches would not overwhelm if with AD (in case their amount is limited) and the gymnasts would have to spend more time to express themselves.
- Increase the penalty for not having the Dance step combination to 1.0 in the routine
Dynamic Elements with rotation
- The “Wow” effect in R is created through a difficult throw and/or difficult catch.
We propose :
To change the definition of R :
R is 2 rotations, first of them can be performed during the throw or apparatus or under the flight of apparatus, 2nd rotation must be performed under the flight of apparatus.
3rd+ rotation must be performed under the flight of the apparatus or during the catch of the apparatus outside of visual field
The judges are much confused by the catch in last rotation and it often created discepancies in scores. Some judges count such version of catch in 3rd rotation, some judges would say that this is not valid. And it actually does not contribute to the actual difficulty of the routine. So we proposed to eliminate such possibility of catch in rotation when the gymnast has a clear view of the apparatus.
For example in this example the gymnast is performing the rotations UNDER the flight of the apparatus which gives her higher risk of dropping it. While with the current COP and the current draft COP it’s easier for her to perform the «catch in the last rotation» and gain higher points.
- Eliminate the criteria «catch in rotation» when combined with «outside of visual field». Too confusing for the judges to evaluate and remember to give this criteria.
- Clear the definition of outside of visual field
The judges are often confused if they should count the outside of visual field in such examples or not.
Our proposal :
Outside of visual field is counted in the catch of rotation backwards or any position backwards IN CASE during the catch the position of the head is below horizontal level.
Current value and value of the COP draft : 0,10 oblique throw + 0,20 for 2 rotations + 0,10 for change of axis + 0,10 for catch outside visual field + 0,10 for catch in rotation + 0,10 for catch without hands = 0,70
PROPOSED value : 0,10 oblique throw + 0,10 vertical rotation + 0,20 for horizontal rotation + 0,10 for catch outside of visual field + 0,10 for catch without hands = 0,60
The R itself does not look like a WOW effect, so the gymnast should be pushed to either increase it by adding horizontal rotations or adding more criteria for the catch.
In this case the last rotation of R would not be valid as the catch is performed on the line of the horizontal level and not below.
See photo :
- To limit the “chaine” and “quasi-chaine” rotations. Only 1 type. Most gymnasts are using very similar chaine-like rotations which gives a repeated impression inside the exercise.
To allow the only possibilities of vertical standing rotations as follows :
All the difficulties with rotation on 360 degrees can be used (like jump 1, 2, 3, 4 etc)
So that the judge had an obvious difference.
In this case the judge would give an automatical 0 for the second R without the need to think if the feet position was a bit different or not. Less time to analyze the situation — the higher potential of a correct evaluation.
- To increase the value of horizontal rotations vs vertical rotations.
For example, 1 chaine = 0.10, 1 illussion = 0.20
3 chaine – 0,30
3 illusions – 0,60
Horizontal rotations are much more difficult to perform and they give a spectacular “wow” effect of the exercise.
Value 0,20 (same as Old COP)
Value 0,30 (same as old COP)
New value : 0,20 x 3 = 0.60 instead of 0.30
New value : 0,20 x 4 + 0,10 for the oblique throw + 0,10 for the catch without hands = 1.0
- To eliminate the «change of axis/level» criteria as it does not contribute to the actual difficulty of the dynamic element with rotation. For example, in this video the gymnast SIMPLIFIES the R by changing from a horizontal rotation to vertical rotation, but gets a bonus for doing this
Old value and a value in the draft COP : 0,20 for 2 rotations + 0,10 for change of axis + 0,10 for throw without hands + 0,10 for throw with change of hoop’s axis + 0,10 throw for outside visual field = 0,60
New value : 0,20 for horizontal rotation + 0,10 for vertical rotation + 0,10 for throw without hands + 0,10 for throw with change of hoop’s axis + 0,10 throw for outside visual field = 0,60
The value remains the same, but the gymnast is ENCOURAGED to make a second horizontal rotation and will be awarded with 0,10 for doing so.
Current value and draft COP value : 0,20 for 2 rotations + 0,10 for change of axis = 0,30
PROPOSED value : 0,20 for horizonta rotation + 0,10 for vertical rotation = 0,30
In this case the gymnast is encouraged to make more difficult horizontal rotations (for example, 2 rolls) and will be credited with 0,40.
- R increase the double throw of the clubs to +0.20
Currently it’s much easier to throw 1 club and catch it by the other club (would cost the same as the throw of 2 clubs).
Current COP value : 2 rotations, throw below the leg, 2 clubs = 0.40
PROPOSED value (increased difficulty) : 2 horizontal rotations 2×0,20 = 0,40 + throw below the leg 0,10 + throw of 2 clubs 0,20 = 0,70
The last rotation is obviously disregarded
Overall suggestion :
- To give a definition ONLY to : small/medium throws and high throws. To have only 2 groups of throws and not 3 types of throws. This currently leads to a confusion and difference in scoring. A throw has to be either large or medium/small.
- Not to prioritize catches from high throws. Catches from high throws should have the same value as the fundamental groups (which we don’t see now very often as the gymnasts are overusing the catches).
- It appears to us that the gymnasts have forgotten how to make rolls with apparatus. The gymnasts are overusing small throws/catches and rebounds.
- We propose : To delete the possibility of using small/medium throw/catch of a ball as an AD.
- It appears to us when viewing this video that the importance of clubs routine can only be underlined through the continuous work of 2 clubs.
Currently the exercises are overwhelmed with a work of 1 clubs (throws, catches, small throws/catches, small circle of one club) while the other club is basically motionless.
In order to improve this we propose :
- To limit the possibility of using «locked clubs» to only once a routine for 1 element (R, BD or AD).
- To delete the possibility of using small/medium throw/catch of 1 club as an AD. This would encourage the gymnasts to use only the small throws/catches of 2 clubs which gives the wow affect to the exercise.
- Add «echappe» as the fundamental base
- Delete the possibility of using «small throws and catches» with ribbon.
- To change the concept of scoring Artistry by applying penalties to a scoring “by addition”.
- As a concept you can not PENALIZE artistry faults. Artistry gives an additional spectacular value to the exercise, it’s an add-on which should be awarded and not penalized.
- Psychologically for the judges evaluation by “addition” works much better than by making penalties. Sometimes penalizing top gymnasts may create difficulties in judges’ minds. For the judge it is easier to evaluate a gymnast by saying “that’s so good that I give her top points” rather than deciding if the gymnast was so bad that we have to apply a penalty.
- General idea : 10 points to Artistry
Creating 5 lines that support Artistry of the exercise
Giving different Coefficients to each of the line depending on how it contributes to the artistic performance
Scoring system :
Giving points for each of the line
Multiplying the coefficient x the score of each line
Adding the total scores of each line = final Artistry score.
|Guiding idea, unity||0,8||X||0|
|Rhythm, including effects through body and apparatus||0,5||X||0,5|
|Logical connections + variety of travelling||0,3||X||0,3|
|Body expression (including amplitude of the movements)||0,2||X||0,2|